After working in AI research for about 10 years, I suspect that most of what you see (especially outside "scientific" literature) is... very sophisticated smoke

After working in AI research for about 10 years, I suspect that most of what you see (especially outside "scientific" literature) is... very sophisticated smoke and mirrors. My favorite example of this is IBM's Watson. But people just ignore Watson's gaffes because they don't fit the narrative. To refresh people's recollections, here's the Final Jeopardy category of a man/machine contest from a number of years ago: U.S. Cities Clue: Its largest airport is named for a World War II hero; It's second largest, for a World War II battle Watson: What is Toronto????? The correct answer is: What is Chicago? The humans didn't have a problem with it. O'hare airport, Midway airport. It's quite obvious that Watson didn't understand the question at all. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5Xnxjq63Zg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5Xnxjq63Zg